TERMS OF REFERENCE. Project Name: Support Project for the Rwanda Integrated Development Initiative

Transcription

1 TERMS OF REFERENCE Consultancy Final Evaluation of Support Project for the Rwanda Integrated Development Initiative (IDP- Mutobo) Project-MINALOC / UNDP Project Name: Support Project for the Rwanda Integrated Development Initiative Award ID: Project Duration: 2 years Implementing Partner: Ministry of Local Government Over the past 16 years, the Government of Rwanda (GoR) initiated several policies, policy reforms and implemented sector-specific social-economic program aimed at improving the living conditions of the people and achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The national long-term development goals are contained in the Vision 2020 and the Economic Development Poverty Reduction Strategy, , (EDPRS). The overriding long-term national development objective is to transform Rwanda into a middle-income country and a knowledge-based economy by The thematic priorities and indicators included in both the EDPRS and Vision 2020 demonstrate the government commitment to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the most recent data show that Rwanda is on track to achieving the MDGs on primary school enrolment, gender equality and reduction of child mortality. In the area of human population settlements, the National Human Settlement Policy of 2004 lays out the basis for planning resettlement of populations for improved service provision, particularly for people from the mountainous areas. The policy outlines the importance of orderly population settlement in Rwanda, spelling out the benefits of improvement of access to social services where people live closer to each. This eases planning for the provision of services including health care, education, water and sanitation, electricity, and other

2 infrastructure thus enhancing the possibility of improved quality of life and meeting the Vision 2020 and EDPRS targets and MDGs. The Population Resettlement Law of 2008 defines the settlement procedures and lays out the obligations of the central and local government for smooth resettlement of populations. The Government has already initiated resettlement programmes in five different areas in four Provinces and City of Kigali, One in the Eastern Province (Kayonza and Rwamagana Districts), one in the Northern Province (Musanze district), one in the Western Province (Karongi District), one in Southern Province (Kamonyi District) and one in City of Kigali (Gasabo District). In the spirit of the Paris Declaration, the UN Rwanda DaO programme , is based on the national priorities identified in the Vision 2020 and the EDPRS. In this context, the UN is proposing to respond to the Government s initiative by developing a model for improved human settlements, building on experiences gained in Rwanda and other countries through South-South Cooperation. The results and experiences gained in the development and implementation of this programme will significantly contribute to Rwanda s development goals. The UN proposes to work closely with the GoR, through the MINALOC to support the Mutobo settlement project in Musanze district, Northern Province and Kayonza/Rwamagana project in Kayonza and Rwamagana Districts, Eastern Province. This project was created with aims to support the Government of Rwanda particularly the Ministry of local Government to strengthen the National Human Settlement Policy and Strategy in aspects related to environment management, local governance enhancement and technology-driven local productivity. The expected result of this would be to transform the Rwanda human settlement model, in a way that accelerates the achievement of all MDGs and EDPRS targets, including drastic reductions in population growth, maternal and neonatal deaths. 1. INTRODUCTION: a) UNDP Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Policy The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) policy at the project level in UNDP has four objectives: i) to monitor and evaluate results and impacts; ii) to provide a basis for decision making on necessary amendments and improvements; iii) to promote accountability for resource use; and iv) to document, provide feedback on, and disseminate lessons learned. A mix of tools is used to ensure effective project M&E. These might be applied continuously throughout the lifetime of the

3 project e.g. periodic monitoring of indicators or as specific time-bound exercises such as mid-term reviews, audit reports and final evaluations. Final evaluations are intended to assess the relevance, performance and success of the project. It looks at early signs of potential impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of sustainable development goals. It will also identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that might improve design and implementation of other UNDP projects or to scale up the currents project in other districts of Rwanda. b) The Project Objectives The Mutobo Integrated Development project was established in the aim of transforming the Rwandan human settlement model, in a way that accelerates the achievement of all MDGs and EDPRS targets, including drastic reductions in population growth, maternal and neonatal deaths. The expected outputs of this project were to have; 1. Environment: An enabling policy framework to support an effective system for environment management and ecosystem conservation established; 2. Governance: Community (men, women and youth) participation in democratic processes and structures at District level enhanced; and 3. Sustainable Growth and Social Protection: Improved and sustainable productivity and income generation for all community members. 2. OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION: The Terminal Evaluation of IDP-Mutobo project is commissioned by UNDP Rwanda in accordance with the project s M&E Plan. It is intended to assess the performance of the project against planned results. The results of the evaluation will also inform the partners in the project, on the need for scaling up the model village in Rwanda. This evaluation will provide a professional assessment of the project design, scope, status of implementation and capacity to achieve the set objectives. It will also collate and analyze lessons learnt, challenges faced and best practices obtained during the period of implementation of the project for the development and implementation of future rural settlement and integrated development in Rwanda as one of the objective of the EDPRS II

4 Finally, it will give the recommendation to be based on in the preparation of the similar project to be implemented in other areas of Rwanda. 3. PRODUCTS EXPECTED FROM THE EVALUATION: The evaluation team will be accountable for producing the following products: a) Evaluation inception report An inception report should be prepared by the evaluators before going into the fully fledged evaluation exercise. It should detail the evaluators understanding of what is being evaluated and why, showing how each evaluation question will be answered by way of: Proposed methods; proposed sources of data; and data collection procedures. The inception report should include a proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables, designating responsibilities for each task or product. The inception report provides the project management unit (PMU), the stakeholders and the evaluators with an opportunity to verify that they share the same understanding about the evaluation and clarify any misunderstanding at the outset. The consultant will provide the work plan to be followed from the beginning up to the end of the assignment. The consultants will prepare a brief inception note within 3 to 4 days of commencement of the evaluation reflecting in it all the substantive and logistical issues that would have to be addressed in order to ensure the success of the evaluation.. b) Draft evaluation report This should be made available in English. The PMU and key stakeholders in the evaluation should review the draft evaluation report to ensure that the evaluation meets the required quality criteria. c) Presentation of the findings The key findings of the TE should be presented to relevant stakeholders in a joint meeting in order to obtain participatory comments from them. d) Final evaluation report A stand alone English language document of approximately pages that substantiates its recommendations and conclusions. The report will include mainly the following : A detailed record of consultations with stakeholders (to be provided as part of the information gathered by the evaluators), as an annex to the main report; If there are any significant discrepancies between the impressions and findings of the evaluation team and stakeholders these should be explained in an Annex to be attached to the final report; An updated METT (Monitoring Effectiveness Tracking Tool), with Evaluators comments.

5 4. Methodology and Evaluation Approach The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the performance of the project against planned results and to identify the development achieved by comparison of the living conditions of the project beneficiaries before and after the project implementation; The evaluation will be conducted in a participatory manner through a combination of processes. The evaluation will start with a review of the key project documentation including key reports and correspondence. It will include visits to UNDP Country Office, ILO, UNIDO, WFP and FAO, Project Executing Offices of Government as well as selected international and national partners / stakeholders, including interviews (by phone if necessary) with key individuals both within the project, the government. Field visits to project sites will be conducted to view activities first hand where necessary and to meet with site partners, local leaders, and local government officials. The Evaluation Team and the UN agencies will discuss the optimum number and duration of site visits with the Project team at the start. As part of the evaluation the consultant is expected to consult with a broad range of stakeholders within government, non-governmental organizations and local communities. A review of partners and appreciation of their linkage and interest in the project and the relevance of the project to their current situation is essential. The evaluation is expected to obtain the views of both the project implementing parties, the project governance structure and the project beneficiaries. The final decisions about the specific design and methods for the evaluation will be concluded at the inception of the TE. The evaluation will also reflect on whether and how monitoring and evaluation were considered in the project design and undertaken during implementation. In addition to a descriptive assessment, a rating following the UNDP six-point rating scale: Highly Satisfactory (HS), Satisfactory (S), Marginally Satisfactory (MS), Marginally Unsatisfactory (MU), Unsatisfactory (U), or Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) should be applied to the following parts of the evaluation findings: Executive Summary: Progress towards project goal and outcome Project Implementation Results: Attainment of Objectives, and Progress towards Outcomes Monitoring & Evaluation System.

6 For each Outcome, sustainability will be assessed using the 4 point-scale of Likely (L): There are no risks affecting this dimension of sustainability; Moderately Likely (ML). There are moderate risks that affect this dimension of sustainability; Moderately Unlikely (MU): There are significant risks that affect this dimension of sustainability, and Unlikely (U): There are severe risks that affect this dimension of sustainability. The following elements of sustainability will be considered: Financial resources: Are there any financial risks involved in sustaining the project outcomes? What is the likelihood that financial and economic resources will not be available once the ONE UN agencies assistance ends (resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and trends that may indicate that it is likely that in future there will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project s outcomes)? Socio-political: Are there any social or political risks that can undermine the longevity of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Institutional framework and governance: Do the legal frameworks, policies and governance structures and processes pose any threat to the continuation of project benefits? While assessing on this parameter also consider if the required systems for accountability and transparency, and the required technical know-how is in place. Environmental: Are there any environmental risks that can undermine the future flow of project environmental benefits? The evaluation should assess whether certain activities in the project area will pose a threat to the sustainability of the project outcomes. For example, construction of dam in a protected area could inundate a sizable area and thereby neutralizing the biodiversity related gains made by the project. The evaluation will also assess how the project managed the risks and the successes and failures of the adaptive management of the project. The evaluation will cover all project activities from Inception to the time of evaluation; include all nongovernmental organizations, government entities and local communities involved in the project. Although the project had listed individuals as the target, due to the duration and scale of the project, the sampling will need to systematically select those individuals that have interacted most with the project.

7 The evaluation will last for 45 days and the final report to be concluded within 1-2 weeks of completion of the in-country part of the mission and sent to UNDP- Rwanda Country Office. It is anticipated that the methodology to be used for the Evaluation will include the following: a) Review of documentation including but not limited to:- i) Project Document ii) Project implementation reports (APR/PIR s); iii) Quarterly progress reports and work plans of the various implementation task teams; iv) Annual technical reports v) Baselines and other study reports produced during the project implementation vi) District Development Plans vii) UNDAF, EDPRS I, Vision 2020, Ubudehe programme document, 7GYP viii) Policies, Legislations and Regulations regarding land and natural resources management ix) Any other documentation that may be deemed necessary. b) Review of supplementary documentation should be as follows (nonexhaustive): i) Minutes of the project Steering Committee and Technical Committee meetings; ii) MoU between the ONE UN agencies and the Government of Rwanda on project implementation iii) MoUs between the other key project partners. iv) The UNDP Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks v) Technical reports and publications vi) Documents on project website. Interviews in the field with stakeholders could include, among others: i) Project team, ONE UN agencies project staff who have project responsibilities including their tasks ii) Regional and District authorities and technical officers iii) Members of the Steering Committee. iv) Project stakeholders v) Community based organizations. c) Presentation of the findings The initial conclusions and recommendations will be presented to the Project team, Executing Agency, project partners and One UN agencies representative for their comments. Once these are integrated, a final draft will be presented to UNDP for comments by wider group of stakeholders. Written comments will be

8 submitted to the team leader for finalization of the evaluation report within a period of one (1) to two (2) weeks. 5. Implementation Arrangements a) Management Arrangements The role of UNDP-Country Office is to contract the consultants, oversee the implementation of the agreed schedule of consultation activities, wide stakeholder consultation and verification of all facts in the report and oversee the production of the final Report and follow-up actions. The Country Office is the main operational point for the evaluation. It will be responsible for liaising with the project team to set up the stakeholder interviews, arrange the field visits, co-ordinate with the Government and other key stakeholders and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the evaluation team. These three parties will receive a draft of the final evaluation report and provide comments on it prior to its completion. b) Time Frame The evaluation will be undertaken in 30 working days. The consultants will be provided with information to prepare (with the support of the UNDP Country Office) a table that depicts tasks, timelines and deliverables, for which the consultants will be responsible and accountable, as well as those involving the commissioning office (UNDP-CO), indicating for each, who is responsible for its completion. In addition, the evaluators are expected to support ONE UN agencies efforts in knowledge sharing and dissemination. Required formats for the inception reports, evaluation reports and other deliverables will be made available to the consultants by the UNDP Country Office upon request. The consultants shall be allocated 30 working days over a 30 day period during which s/he will be engaged in the evaluation. 6. Scope of the Evaluation The scope of the evaluation for this project reflects the diverse range of activities as defined in the Log-Frame and Results Matrix. Three main elements to be evaluated are Delivery, Implementation and Finances. Each component will be

9 evaluated using three criteria: effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness. The Annex on the structure of the Evaluation Report outlines the content and depth of the analysis. b) Implementation approach Review the clarity of roles and responsibilities of the various individuals, agencies and institutions and the level of coordination between relevant players. Assess the level to which the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) and performance indicators were used as project management tools; Evaluate any partnership arrangements established for implementation of the project with relevant stakeholders involved in the country /region; Describe and assess the efforts of UNDP and other ONE UN agencies in support of the implementing agencies, regional and national institutions; Make recommendations as to how to improve future projects performance in terms of effectiveness and efficiency in achieving impact on institutional and capacity development and the targeted environmental concerns. c) Country ownership/drivenness Assess the extent to which the representatives of the country (including governmental officials, local communities, civil society etc.) were actively involved in project implementation. d) Co-financing Assess whether the governments and other partners have maintained financial commitments to the project and undertake a reconciliation of the co-financing pledged and realized. e) Stakeholder Participation and benefits accrued Assess the level of public involvement in the project and comment as to whether the scope of public involvement has been appropriate given the broader goals and objectives of the project; Review and evaluate the extent to which project benefits have reached the intended beneficiaries. f) Sustainability Assess the likelihood of continuation of project outcomes/benefits after completion of One UNE agencies funding; and describe the key factors that will

10 require attention in order to improve prospects for sustainability of project outcomes. Factors of sustainability that should be considered include; institutional capacity (systems, structures, staff, expertise, etc.) social sustainability, policy and regulatory frameworks that further the project objectives, financial sustainability. g) Replication Approach Describe the main lessons that have emerged in terms of: strengthening country ownership/drivenness; strengthening stakeholder participation; institutional structure and capacity building; application of adaptive management strategies; efforts to secure sustainability; knowledge transfer; and the role of M&E in project implementation. In describing all lessons learned, an explicit distinction needs to be made between those lessons applicable only to this project, and lessons that may be of value more broadly. Make recommendations on how the lessons and experience can be incorporated into the design of a second phase or similar initiatives in the future. h) Financial Planning Assess the financial control systems, including reporting and planning, that allowed the project management to make informed decisions regarding the budget; Assess the extent to which the flow of funds had been proper and timely both from UNDP and from the project management unit to the field; Evaluate the extent of due diligence in the management of funds and financial audits. i) Cost effectiveness Assess the extent to which the project has completed the planned activities and met or exceeded the expected outcomes according to schedule and as cost effectively as initially planned. j) Monitoring and Evaluation Review the project s reporting systems and their efficiency; and the implementation of the project s monitoring and evaluation plans including any adaptation to changing conditions (adaptive management) and specifically, assess whether the lessons, insights and recommendations of the mid-term evaluation were applied successfully to re-direct the project.

11 7. Consultants Competencies & Selection Procedures The consultant is expected to work in a team. The team must include at least one person qualified to comment on the broader aspects of Socio-economic development and Integrated Development Programs from the perspective of population s participation in local decision making. The team must also include an expert on local decision making and planning processes. The team must be very well immersed in livestock production and understand all aspects of human settlement planning and development. The consultant to be considered must possess the following profile and experience: Proven competencies in facilitation skills with UN inter-agency groups (such as UNCTs) with demonstrable experience working for the United Nations System Proven experience of UN Operations or Program management Familiarity with Operations Management activities at country level Familiarity with the UNDAF processes Knowledge of the DAO process and experience working in DAO settings is highly beneficial Demonstrable working knowledge of UN reform required; knowledge of the Rwanda UNDAF will be beneficial At least 5 years work experience, including substantial work experience in the UN System 8. Qualification Consultant team should comprise candidates with Post-graduate degrees in Business Administration, Economics, Social Sciences and other related fields; At least 5 years experience in the field of UN Operations (Finance, Admin, Procurement, HR etc ) Have proven experience in participating to Operations Management Team common services work with International Organisations Experience in Business Operations management, work process redesigning, business process mapping etc Language Requirements: Fluency (both verbal and written) in English with a good knowledge of French. 9. Finalization and Report

12 After making field visits at all three sites (Musanze District, Rwamagana and Kayonza Districts), the consultant will be given 2 weeks to analyse all data and 2 weeks for reporting. The consultant should submit to the client a final report in 4 hard copies and one soft copy. He should also conduct a validation workshop with all stakeholders 10. SUBMISSIONS 10.1 Technical proposal a) Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP; b) Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience in the field of UN Operations/Program and meeting facilitation, as well as the contact details ( and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references; c) Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a methodology, on how they will approach and complete the assignment; 10.2 Financial proposal Financial Proposal that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided. If an Offer is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the Offer must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP. Submissions will be evaluated in consideration of the Evaluation Criteria as stated below: The offer will be evaluated by using the Best value for money approach (combined scoring method). Technical proposal will be evaluated on 70%. Whereas the financial one will be evaluated on 30%. Below is the breakdown of technical proposal on 100% which will be brought to 70%: Criteria Weight Max. Point

13 Technical Qualification 10 % 10 At least 5 years experience in the field of UN Operations (Finance, Admin, Procurement, HR etc ) 20 % 20 Overall Methodology 40% 40 Experience in Business 20% 20 Operations management, work process redesigning, Business Process Mapping etc Proven competencies in 5% 5 facilitation skills with UN inter-agency groups (such as UNCTs) with demonstrable experience working for the United Nations System Fluency in English and a 5% 5 working knowledge of one of the other language TOTAL 100% 100 AUKE LOOTSMA Country Director United Nations Development Programme